Difference between revisions of "Developer Meetings/20121113"

From Slicer Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m
 
(7 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
__TOC__
 
== To discuss ==
 
== To discuss ==
 
* 4.2 branch - See http://slicer-devel.65872.n3.nabble.com/Feedback-requested-Slicer-4-2-branch-has-been-created-tt4026787.html
 
* 4.2 branch - See http://slicer-devel.65872.n3.nabble.com/Feedback-requested-Slicer-4-2-branch-has-been-created-tt4026787.html
Line 10: Line 11:
  
 
== Conclusion ==
 
== Conclusion ==
* Checked with Jim and update of Jqplot won't be backported
+
* Checked with Jim: update of Jqplot won't be backported
 
* Alex will check that topic associated with issue [http://www.na-mic.org/Bug/view.php?id=2374 2374] works.
 
* Alex will check that topic associated with issue [http://www.na-mic.org/Bug/view.php?id=2374 2374] works.
 
** Alex checked during the hangout and found out an issue. Julien will be fixing the issue.
 
** Alex checked during the hangout and found out an issue. Julien will be fixing the issue.
Line 17: Line 18:
 
* Issue [http://na-mic.org/Bug/view.php?id=2513 2513] - Seems there are still issue with the mdb ...  
 
* Issue [http://na-mic.org/Bug/view.php?id=2513 2513] - Seems there are still issue with the mdb ...  
 
* Discussed failing test [http://slicer.cdash.org/testDetails.php?test=3133893&build=47198 py_AtlasTest]
 
* Discussed failing test [http://slicer.cdash.org/testDetails.php?test=3133893&build=47198 py_AtlasTest]
** Error <code>SystemError: Objects/classobject.c:508: bad argument to internal function</code> has been identified by Steve and will be fix.
+
** Error <code>SystemError: Objects/classobject.c:508: bad argument to internal function</code> has been identified by Steve and will be fixed.
 
* Discussed Markus issue. The options are:
 
* Discussed Markus issue. The options are:
 
** Fix GenerateCLP. See https://github.com/Slicer/SlicerExecutionModel#contributing
 
** Fix GenerateCLP. See https://github.com/Slicer/SlicerExecutionModel#contributing
Line 25: Line 26:
 
*** Steve: Create a derived volume subclass
 
*** Steve: Create a derived volume subclass
 
** Markus will send an email to both the user and devel asking if his proposed change should be integrated into the original module.
 
** Markus will send an email to both the user and devel asking if his proposed change should be integrated into the original module.
 +
* Andriy discussed new issue [http://www.na-mic.org/Bug/view.php?id=2748 2748], seems to be a regression related to [http://www.na-mic.org/Bug/view.php?id=1817 1817]
 +
** Seems storage node is missing
 +
** Julien: Way of loading module should be uniform, should avoid code duplication
 +
* Discussed mantis workflow
 +
** Nicole pointed out that the difference between Acknowledged and Confirmed may be a source of confusion
 +
** We should revisit the workflow discussion after the release and we migrate to git.
  
 
== Additional material ==
 
== Additional material ==

Latest revision as of 19:03, 21 November 2012

Home < Developer Meetings < 20121113

To discuss

Conclusion

  • Checked with Jim: update of Jqplot won't be backported
  • Alex will check that topic associated with issue 2374 works.
    • Alex checked during the hangout and found out an issue. Julien will be fixing the issue.
  • Nicole will touch base with Jim about issue #2732.
  • Jc: #2535 - Check that SlicerRt extension can be installed on linux + plastimatch module working
  • Issue 2513 - Seems there are still issue with the mdb ...
  • Discussed failing test py_AtlasTest
    • Error SystemError: Objects/classobject.c:508: bad argument to internal function has been identified by Steve and will be fixed.
  • Discussed Markus issue. The options are:
  • Andriy discussed new issue 2748, seems to be a regression related to 1817
    • Seems storage node is missing
    • Julien: Way of loading module should be uniform, should avoid code duplication
  • Discussed mantis workflow
    • Nicole pointed out that the difference between Acknowledged and Confirmed may be a source of confusion
    • We should revisit the workflow discussion after the release and we migrate to git.

Additional material